Your message dated Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:46:14 +0100
with message-id <20121115194614.ga5...@jwilk.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
has caused the Debian Bug report #683184,
regarding RFS: suckless-tools/39-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you clai
On 17:08 Thu 15 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-15, 17:22:
> What did this line do, and why it was removed?
> find . -name config.mk | xargs sed -i 's,-s ${LIBS},${LIBS},'
> >>>Not sure why it was removed, it was not present when I took
> >>>over source from Micah
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-15, 17:22:
What did this line do, and why it was removed?
find . -name config.mk | xargs sed -i 's,-s ${LIBS},${LIBS},'
Not sure why it was removed, it was not present when I took over
source from Micahel. After reading man page for *ld* I see that this
option
On 11:18 Thu 15 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-13, 20:13:
> >>What did this line do, and why it was removed?
> >>find . -name config.mk | xargs sed -i 's,-s ${LIBS},${LIBS},'
> >Not sure why it was removed, it was not present when I took over
> >source from Micahel. Af
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-13, 20:13:
What did this line do, and why it was removed?
find . -name config.mk | xargs sed -i 's,-s ${LIBS},${LIBS},'
Not sure why it was removed, it was not present when I took over source
from Micahel. After reading man page for *ld* I see that this option
On 18:37 Wed 14 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-13, 20:13:
> >>Changelog now reads: "Changed License to Expat instead of MIT/X
> >>Consortium License as DEP-5 doesn't allow spaces in License
> >>name." But in 38-2 there were no spaces in short license names.
> [...]
> >Ah t
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-13, 20:13:
Changelog now reads: "Changed License to Expat instead of MIT/X
Consortium License as DEP-5 doesn't allow spaces in License name." But
in 38-2 there were no spaces in short license names.
[...]
Ah this is what happened in previous mail you said copyright
i
On 18:49 Mon 12 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-11, 12:55:
> >Done changed to Expat License.
>
> Changelog now reads: "Changed License to Expat instead of MIT/X
> Consortium License as DEP-5 doesn't allow spaces in License name."
> But in 38-2 there were no spaces in short
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-11, 12:55:
Done changed to Expat License.
Changelog now reads: "Changed License to Expat instead of MIT/X
Consortium License as DEP-5 doesn't allow spaces in License name." But
in 38-2 there were no spaces in short license names.
Please double-check that there are
On 09:20 Sun 11 Nov , intrigeri wrote:
> Jakub Wilk wrote (11 Nov 2012 00:38:28 GMT) :
> > * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-10, 11:28:
> >>> debian/watch contains only a single line "version=3"? Is that
> >>> intentional? As far
> >>> as I can see, this change is not documented in the changelog.
> >
Jakub Wilk wrote (11 Nov 2012 00:38:28 GMT) :
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-10, 11:28:
>>> debian/watch contains only a single line "version=3"? Is that intentional?
>>> As far
>>> as I can see, this change is not documented in the changelog.
>> Yes file is introduced to suppress the lintian warnin
On 01:38 Sun 11 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-10, 11:28:
> >>debian/watch contains only a single line "version=3"? Is that
> >>intentional? As far as I can see, this change is not documented
> >>in the changelog.
> >Yes file is introduced to suppress the lintian warning.
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-11-10, 11:28:
debian/watch contains only a single line "version=3"? Is that
intentional? As far as I can see, this change is not documented in the
changelog.
Yes file is introduced to suppress the lintian warning. Do you think I
need to remove that file?
Nah, keep it.
On 17:55 Wed 07 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Addition of debian/README.slock.Debian doesn't seem to be documented
> in the changelog.
Done now.. Sorry I missed that file also I updated the file now to
reflect changes in slock 1.1
>
> debian/watch contains only a single line "version=3"? Is that
Addition of debian/README.slock.Debian doesn't seem to be documented in
the changelog.
debian/watch contains only a single line "version=3"? Is that
intentional? As far as I can see, this change is not documented in the
changelog.
" * Merge new version 39" - sorry, what does it mean? AFAIUI
On 20:33 Sun 04 Nov , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-30, 20:32:
> >>.hg_archival.txt is no longer in sprop tarball, so it should be
> >>removed from the repository, too.
> >Done and changes back in the git.
>
> I don't see any relevant changes in the repository…
>
Sorry forgot
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-30, 20:32:
.hg_archival.txt is no longer in sprop tarball, so it should be
removed from the repository, too.
Done and changes back in the git.
I don't see any relevant changes in the repository…
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@list
On 17:59 Mon 29 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-28, 23:06:
> >Anselm got sprop a place in dl.suckless.org so I reverted
> >copyright to its original format and modified create_orig_source
> >to refer dl.suckless.org.
>
> I can't build source package anymore:
> | dpkg-sourc
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> I can't build source package anymore:
> | dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are:
> | git/sprop/.hg_archival.txt
> | dpkg-source: info: you can integrate the local changes with dpkg-source
> --commit
>
> .hg_archival
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-28, 23:06:
Anselm got sprop a place in dl.suckless.org so I reverted copyright to
its original format and modified create_orig_source to refer
dl.suckless.org.
I can't build source package anymore:
| dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are:
On 13:40 Sun 28 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
Anselm got sprop a place in dl.suckless.org so I reverted copyright to
its original format and modified create_orig_source to refer
dl.suckless.org.
Changes are back in the git
Best Regards
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendic
On 19:27 Sun 28 Oct , Vasudev Kamath wrote:
> On 13:40 Sun 28 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-28, 10:45:
> > I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific
> > revision of prop (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip.
> > That would make the s
On 13:40 Sun 28 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-28, 10:45:
> I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific
> revision of prop (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip.
> That would make the script more deterministic.
> >>>Done.
>
> Okay, how about
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-28, 10:45:
I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific revision
of prop (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip. That would make
the script more deterministic.
Done.
Okay, how about this patch? (see attachment)
I wonder what is the purpose of ssid.
On 16:09 Thu 25 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-25, 11:54:
> >>Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for
> >>sprop (i.e. hg.suckless.org) too?
> >>
> >>I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific
> >>revision of prop (currently ecfe2752b
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-25, 11:54:
Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for sprop
(i.e. hg.suckless.org) too?
I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific revision of
prop (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip. That would make the
script more determi
On 22:23 Tue 09 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for
> sprop (i.e. hg.suckless.org) too?
>
> I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific revision
> of prop (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip. That would make
> the script
Vasudev Kamath wrote (15 Oct 2012 17:38:41 GMT) :
> On 19:08 Mon 15 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
>> I think you should read the documentation about "-s ours",
>> before concluding you can't merge it back to master.
> Tried that but what here happens is wheezy branch is based on master
> which doesn'
Processing control commands:
> reopen -1
Bug #683184 {Done: Bart Martens }
[sponsorship-requests] RFS: suckless-tools/39-1
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #683184 to the same values
previously set
--
683184: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683
Control: reopen -1
* Bart Martens , 2012-10-17, 16:20:
Package suckless-tools has been removed from mentors.
That's not a reason to close an RFS.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@li
Your message dated Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:20:14 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: suckless-tools/39-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #683184,
regarding RFS: suckless-tools/39-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: close -2
Control: retitle -1 RFS: suckless-tools/39-1
I uploaded suckless-tools 38-2. Release Team normally notices and
unblocks uploads fixing RC bugs themselves, but if this doesn't happen
in a few days, please request an unblock (reportbug release.debia
eval {...} called at
/usr/local/lib/site_perl/Debbugs/Control/Service.pm line 230
Debbugs::Control::Service::control_line('line', 'close -2',
'clonebugs', 'HASH(0x1b19e50)', 'limit', 'HASH(0x1b21ff0)',
'common_control_options
On 23:28 Mon 15 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-15, 20:13:
> >Now understood the issue correctly. I was using pdebuild and I
> >don't know how it started considering 38-2 as the orig tarball!
> >Well now I used the git-buildpackage and it looks fine.
>
> Indeed, it looks o
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Indeed, it looks okay now.
>
> Why are there 2 newlines between the paragraphs in debian/control? It's not
> clear to me whether this is compliant with Policy §5.1 (though admittedly
> both dpkg and debhelper parsers are happy about it). Could y
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-15, 20:13:
Now understood the issue correctly. I was using pdebuild and I don't
know how it started considering 38-2 as the orig tarball! Well now I
used the git-buildpackage and it looks fine.
Indeed, it looks okay now.
Why are there 2 newlines between the paragrap
On 19:08 Mon 15 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Vasudev Kamath wrote (15 Oct 2012 03:43:55 GMT) :
> >> * git checkout master && git merge -s ours squeeze
>
> > Well I don't really think I can merge it back to master!
>
> I think you should read the documentation about "-s ours",
> before
Hi,
Vasudev Kamath wrote (15 Oct 2012 03:43:55 GMT) :
>> * git checkout master && git merge -s ours squeeze
> Well I don't really think I can merge it back to master!
I think you should read the documentation about "-s ours",
before concluding you can't merge it back to master.
> Well unfortu
On 14:53 Sun 14 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (meta: I'm Vasudev's AM ;)
>
> Vasudev Kamath wrote (12 Oct 2012 03:31:39 GMT) :
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> >> New repository for the squeeze branch feels wrong to me
>
> FWIW it feels wrong to me to. That's wha
On 22:28 Sun 14 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-14, 16:09:
> >>W: suckless-tools source: native-package-with-dash-version
> >Yeah I saw these but I think changing the version number will
> >cause lot of problem right?
>
> It's not the version that is wrong. -1 was a non-na
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> It's not the version that is wrong. -1 was a non-native package, and so
> should be -2. Quoting the tag description:
> "Native source packages are sometimes created by accident. In most cases the
> reason is the location of the original source t
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:23 PM, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (meta: I'm Vasudev's AM ;)
>
> Vasudev Kamath wrote (12 Oct 2012 03:31:39 GMT) :
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>>> New repository for the squeeze branch feels wrong to me
>
> FWIW it feels wrong to me to. That's
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-14, 16:09:
W: suckless-tools source: native-package-with-dash-version
Yeah I saw these but I think changing the version number will cause lot
of problem right?
It's not the version that is wrong. -1 was a non-native package, and so
should be -2. Quoting the tag desc
Hi,
(meta: I'm Vasudev's AM ;)
Vasudev Kamath wrote (12 Oct 2012 03:31:39 GMT) :
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>> New repository for the squeeze branch feels wrong to me
FWIW it feels wrong to me to. That's what branches are for.
Note that branches in the same repositor
On 11:45 Sun 14 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-13, 22:10:
> > + Converted to copyright-format 1.0. (Closes: #685611)
> "Converted to..." doesn't usually play well with the freeze
> policy. But in this case the required changes are small
> enough that hopefu
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-13, 22:10:
+ Converted to copyright-format 1.0. (Closes: #685611)
"Converted to..." doesn't usually play well with the freeze policy.
But in this case the required changes are small enough that
hopefully the Release Team won't mind.
Just changed the wordings a bit.
On 20:53 Thu 11 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-11, 22:34:
> >>>suckless-tools (38-2) unstable; urgency=low
> >>>
> >>>* debian/control:
> >>> + Added myself as maintainer. (Closes: #647090)
> >>> + Vcs-* fields now points to repository on collab-maint
> >>>* debian/copyr
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> New repository for the squeeze branch feels wrong to me, but I'm not really
> qualified to give you any advice. Maybe other -mentors@ readers could chime
> in?
Well it is actually wrong but I can't see other altenative but I think
I will try i
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>
> "license headers" - what's that?
>
Err..
>>> I noticed another flaw of the current copyright file: the license for
>>> st/* is wrong. Please fix this, too.
>>
>> Fixed!
>
>
> You fixed the license short name (well, almost; it should be:
> "
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-11, 09:17:
Additionally I gave new repository name as suckless-tools-wheezy.git
I've not created it yet on collab just would like to know if name is
okay or you can suggest me better name ;)
I'm not a git expert, but isn't it usual to keep multiple branches in
a singl
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-11, 22:34:
suckless-tools (38-2) unstable; urgency=low
* debian/control:
+ Added myself as maintainer. (Closes: #647090)
+ Vcs-* fields now points to repository on collab-maint
* debian/copyright:
+ Converted to copyright-format 1.0. (Closes: #685611)
"Converted
On 22:10 Wed 10 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-10, 21:55:
> >suckless-tools (38-2) unstable; urgency=low
> >
> > * debian/control:
> > + Added myself as maintainer. (Closes: #647090)
> > + Vcs-* fields now points to repository on collab-maint
> > * debian/copyright:
>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>
> "Converted to..." doesn't usually play well with the freeze policy. But in
> this case the required changes are small enough that hopefully the Release
> Team won't mind.
Do you think I should change the Phrase like added the Format:
Upstream
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-10, 21:55:
suckless-tools (38-2) unstable; urgency=low
* debian/control:
+ Added myself as maintainer. (Closes: #647090)
+ Vcs-* fields now points to repository on collab-maint
* debian/copyright:
+ Converted to copyright-format 1.0. (Closes: #685611)
"Con
On 11:03 Wed 10 Oct , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-10, 09:16:
> >>Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for
> >>sprop (i.e. hg.suckless.org) too?
> >
> >Does source: field allow multiple URL's? According to Debian
> >copyright-format [0] this field can be
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-10-10, 09:16:
Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for sprop
(i.e. hg.suckless.org) too?
Does source: field allow multiple URL's? According to Debian
copyright-format [0] this field can be free form text which means I can
put with a note that spr
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for sprop (i.e.
> hg.suckless.org) too?
Does source: field allow multiple URL's? According to Debian
copyright-format [0]
this field can be free form text which means I can put with a
Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for sprop
(i.e. hg.suckless.org) too?
I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific revision of
prop (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip. That would make the
script more deterministic.
Would you mind preparing also
On 13:16 Fri 31 Aug , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-08-31, 16:40:
> >>Now I realized that the other tarballs were created in a wrong
> >>directory, too. (“This target […] leaves [the tarball] in the
> >>current directory.” — Policy §4.9)
> >Hmm.. So I need to leave the tarballs in
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-08-31, 16:40:
Now I realized that the other tarballs were created in a wrong
directory, too. (“This target […] leaves [the tarball] in the current
directory.” — Policy §4.9)
Hmm.. So I need to leave the tarballs in the directory from where rules
is executed? eg debian/ru
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Now I realized that the other tarballs were created in a wrong directory,
> too. (“This target […] leaves [the tarball] in the current directory.” —
> Policy §4.9)
Hmm.. So I need to leave the tarballs in the directory from where
rules is exec
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-08-25, 13:02:
You create the empty suckless-tools_${version}.orig.tar.gz tarball in
the wrong directory.
Fixed
Now I realized that the other tarballs were created in a wrong
directory, too. (“This target […] leaves [the tarball] in the current
directory.” — Policy §4.
On 20:32 Fri 24 Aug , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> You create the empty suckless-tools_${version}.orig.tar.gz tarball
> in the wrong directory.
Fixed
> Why do you redirect tar's stderr to /dev/null?
Removed this too
> I recommend passing these options to tar, so that the user's
> name/group/umask are
On 20:32 Fri 24 Aug , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> You create the empty suckless-tools_${version}.orig.tar.gz tarball
> in the wrong directory.
Ok I messed up. It was fine till I didn't introduced the mktemp to
create secure tmp directory. But when I did I forgot to check where on
earth the .orig.tar.g
You create the empty suckless-tools_${version}.orig.tar.gz tarball in
the wrong directory.
Why do you redirect tar's stderr to /dev/null?
I recommend passing these options to tar, so that the user's
name/group/umask are not leaked:
--owner root --group root --mode a+rX
Have you seen #685611
On 15:49 Mon 20 Aug , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-08-18, 22:07:
> >>get-orig-source: TMPDIR :=$(shell (mktemp --tmpdir -d suckless-tools.))
> >>
> >>It looks like a nice hack, but... it will create a temporary
> >>directory every time debian/rules is run (not only for the
>
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-08-18, 22:07:
get-orig-source: TMPDIR :=$(shell (mktemp --tmpdir -d suckless-tools.))
It looks like a nice hack, but... it will create a temporary directory
every time debian/rules is run (not only for the get-orig-source
target).
Since it was with get-orig-sour
On 20:46 Thu 16 Aug , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-07-30, 21:56:
> >>It doesn't look like it's suitable for wheezy, so please make it
> >>s/unstable/experimental/.
> >Done! When it should be moved to unstable? After wheezy release?
>
> Yes, after wheezy is released.
Okay
> >>>
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-07-30, 21:56:
It doesn't look like it's suitable for wheezy, so please make it
s/unstable/experimental/.
Done! When it should be moved to unstable? After wheezy release?
Yes, after wheezy is released.
+-$ $(tabbed -d >/tmp/tabbed.xid); urxvt -embed $(/tmp/tabbed.xid);
On 10:48 Mon 30 Jul , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> This is only a very rudimentary review. I don't have time to review
> this properly for the time being. Anybody else is welcome to do it
> for me. :)
Thanks.. Wonder how many more silly stuffs show up on actual review
;-)
>
> * Vasudev Kamath , 2012-
This is only a very rudimentary review. I don't have time to review this
properly for the time being. Anybody else is welcome to do it for me. :)
* Vasudev Kamath , 2012-07-29, 22:27:
dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/suckless-tools/suckless-tools_39-1.dsc
More informat
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "suckless-tools"
* Package name: suckless-tools
Version : 39-1
Upstream Author : Suckless community (multiple authors)
* URL : http://suckless.org
* License
Hello,
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Michael Stummvoll wrote:
> I uploaded a new version of the suckless-tools package:
> * dropped st now, cause its maintained by the stterm-packe.
> * included sprop and lsx from the suckless-upstream into the package.
> * changed slock to not suid root b
Hi mentors,
I uploaded a new version of the suckless-tools package:
* dropped st now, cause its maintained by the stterm-packe.
* included sprop and lsx from the suckless-upstream into the package.
* changed slock to not suid root but setgid shadow
* changed to quilt sourceformat with multiple
Hi, thanks.
Now i just need anybody who uploads it :)
Regards,
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f192d08.30...@stummi.org
Wow, thanks for that work.
Michael Stummvoll wrote:
>Hi mentors,
>
>I am looking for a sponsor for my fresh adopted package
>"suckless-tools".
>
> * Package name: suckless-tools
> Version : 39-1
>Upstream Author : Serval (look at the projects in the URL for more
>info)
> * URL
Hi mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my fresh adopted package "suckless-tools".
* Package name: suckless-tools
Version : 39-1
Upstream Author : Serval (look at the projects in the URL for more info)
* URL : http://tools.suckless.org/
* License : MIT
77 matches
Mail list logo
